Lawyer for Tom Condliff, a retired police officer, says human rights appeal to Strasbourg will go ahead to clarify law A health authority that refused to pay for a 22-stone man to be fitted with a gastric band has said it will now fund the operation, in a move that has potentially wide-ranging legal ramifications for future claims by obese people. Tom Condliff, a 62-year-old retired police officer, was told by the North Staffordshire primary care trust (PCT) that it would not pay for the £5,500, life-saving operation. Condliff fought the decision in court, arguing that many other health authorities would have paid for his operation under national guidelines, but judges ruled against him . However, the trust has now said it will fund the operation on the grounds that Condliff, who has a needle phobia and type 2 diabetes, is an “exceptional” case. “I really believe that the operation will save the PCT money,” Condliff said. “The operation will cost the PCT £5,500. At the moment my symptoms, particularly my diabetes, kidney and liver functions, are getting worse week by week and the more ill I become the more support and care I need from the PCT, so the cost of my care without the operation would just keep increasing.” The U-turn is likely to encourage other morbidly obese people to bring similar claims. It is predicted an increasing number of people will need similar surgery as obesity levels in the UK soar. Health researchers predicted last week that the number of obese adults will rise by 73% over the next two decades, from 15 million to 26 million, resulting in more than a million extra cases of diabetes, heart disease and cancer. “I think that my case is a sad indictment of what seems to be happening within some parts of the NHS,” Condliff said. “The litigation has been very difficult for me, and I think it is wrong that people have to resort to legal action to get the treatment.” In a move that will see the rights of obese people placed firmly on the legal agenda, Oliver Wright, Condliff’s solicitor, said he would appeal against the trust’s initial refusal to pay for the operation to the European Court of Human Rights. “The law, as it currently stands, is out of kilter with article 8 of the Human Rights Act [respect for private and family life] and European